Legislation watch
Most Recent Comments
1) at what point... [by Anonymous Citizen on June 17, 2007]Does an entity become seperate from the state when every person in this state that takes out an isurance policy on a vehial or motorcyle has to pay this fee? I think your argument would be better IF there was more than one mcca entity operating in this state. they (the mcca) operate under closed meetings and divulge the financial books to no one. are you saying that the state of michigan has no responsibilites to protect it's citizens from being "LEAGEALLY fleeced"? If they (the mcca) are on the up and up then they should have no problem with divulging finances and open meetings.
It was reported last year that ther was a surplus of 9 BILLON us dollers and tey cry that they are broke?. the mcca rate increases were originally set in law by the same bill that establishes no fault insurance, to me that in itself would be sufficant to say that the constitutionality aspect is null and void seeing how the state could mandate it as it created it.
anyway you slice this it stinks to high heaven.
D. Kenzie
Reply
is a niggling little thing that this state and it's legislature have never worried about before, what makes you think they are going to worry about it now?
Reply
This is another ill-conceived, government solution to a government created problem -- the high cost of Michigan's mandatory unlimited PIP benefits. Michigan is the ONLY state that imposes such expensive auto insurance benefits on its citizens. If Michigan would only impose a limit on the medical benefits drivers must purchase (even a limit that is 2 or 3 times the national average)insurers would no longer be forced to purchase reinsurance through the MCCA for future claims costs. Maybe that's too reasonable.
Of course, the MCCA already retains auditors in its efforts to responsibly discharge its fiduciary duties – to private insurance companies – not to the state. And that is appropriate since the industry’s collective surplus, not the state or taxpayers, secures the MCCA’s obligations. Until the state takes over the administrative and financial burdens of the MCCA (making it a state agency), it is unfair – and unconstitutional – to ask the Auditor General to audit its operations.
Here's how this bill would require the Auditor General to violate the state constitution:
The Auditor General has constitutional authority to “conduct post audits of financial transactions and accounts of the state and of all branches, departments, offices, boards, commissions, agencies, authorities and institutions of the state established by this constitution or by law, and performance post audits thereof.” Const 1963, art 4 § 53. This grant of authority has been correctly and consistently interpreted to authorize audits of state agencies only, and to prohibit the Auditor General from auditing private entities. Moreover, the Michigan Supreme Court has already determined that the MCCA is not a state agency, rather it is a private association. (League General Ins. Co. v. Michigan Catastrophic Claims Ass’n, 4354 Mich. 338 (1990)).
Accordingly, even if HB 4002 is enacted, it is unclear how it would pass constitutional muster.
Reply
View Full Conversation
